Finalists spent several weeks preparing by anticipating possible questions from judges and rehearsing appropriate responses.
"(In the final weeks) you're either mooting or your sitting down and looking at the problems thinking about ways you can rephrase things (or) rework things," said finalist Katie Borden.
In an interview after the event, Alito said that the case was very relevant to modern law. What constitutes a "search and seizure" online is a critical law debate and is constantly reshaping the Fourth Amendment, he said.
"Now we're entering this new virtual world," Alito said, "and we have to translate the precedents and principles we have dealing with physical grounds to the world of electronic communication."
Throughout the trial, Alito related private online message boards to physical storefronts with owners that only allow certain clientele inside.
Judge Wood said that cyber-privacy is a complex law debate being addressed in courts across the nation. "Many of the most challenging issues that are coming before the courts ... have to do with new technologies and Internet technologies," Wood said. "So it was an excellent problem from that point of view."
In the past decade, five Supreme Court Justices have presided over the Van Vleck Moot Court. Dean Lawrence said that the judges are often asked to participate in the contest a year in advance.
"Obviously the Supreme Court Justice is the anchor position that you want to be able to get on the court," Lawrence said. He added that Law School professors Brad Clark and Josh Schwartz-both of whom are friends with Alito-helped bring the Justice to GW this year.
"These judges come here, they go back to their courts, and they talk about what they saw today," Lawrence said. "It enhances the reputation (of the school) in terms of the people who talk about us."
When asked about possible judges for next year's competition, Lawrence said "We're already working on it."
"(In the final weeks) you're either mooting or your sitting down and looking at the problems thinking about ways you can rephrase things (or) rework things," said finalist Katie Borden.
In an interview after the event, Alito said that the case was very relevant to modern law. What constitutes a "search and seizure" online is a critical law debate and is constantly reshaping the Fourth Amendment, he said.
"Now we're entering this new virtual world," Alito said, "and we have to translate the precedents and principles we have dealing with physical grounds to the world of electronic communication."
Throughout the trial, Alito related private online message boards to physical storefronts with owners that only allow certain clientele inside.
Judge Wood said that cyber-privacy is a complex law debate being addressed in courts across the nation. "Many of the most challenging issues that are coming before the courts ... have to do with new technologies and Internet technologies," Wood said. "So it was an excellent problem from that point of view."
In the past decade, five Supreme Court Justices have presided over the Van Vleck Moot Court. Dean Lawrence said that the judges are often asked to participate in the contest a year in advance.
"Obviously the Supreme Court Justice is the anchor position that you want to be able to get on the court," Lawrence said. He added that Law School professors Brad Clark and Josh Schwartz-both of whom are friends with Alito-helped bring the Justice to GW this year.
"These judges come here, they go back to their courts, and they talk about what they saw today," Lawrence said. "It enhances the reputation (of the school) in terms of the people who talk about us."
When asked about possible judges for next year's competition, Lawrence said "We're already working on it."
